Design Computing and Cognition '12 pp 393-411 | Cite as
On the Evolution of Thoughts, Shapes and Space in Architectural Design
Abstract
With a common vision, studies that looked into the configurations of shapes and structures in architectural spaces agree on the possibility of externalizing a universal language to interpret architectural artifacts. Focused on the product of architecture, it is less clear how this language evolves in the course of design. Studies within the framework of protocol analysis have been devised to decode design cognitive activity. In what concerns architecture as a social artifact, these studies were detached from the syntactic and grammatical readings of architecture. In an attempt to bring the relationship that couples form and structure together with the pronounced mental activity we aim at capturing regularities that tie thoughts, shapes and structures as they coevolve. For the purpose of the analysis, verbal comments along with their associated hand-drawn sketches were tracked in progress focusing on how space is partitioned in real-time. The addition of partitions marks changes on shapes and structures of the designed spaces. The paper discusses parametric relationships between shapes and structures as they change over the course of design and tracks their associated cognitive behavior on a linkograph. Our findings suggest that architects even though starting from different design preferences plot similarities in the course of design thinking and doing.
Notes
Acknowledgments
I wish to thank Sean Hanna, Ruth Dalton, Christoph Hölscher for their support.
References
- 1.Cross N (1984) Developments in design methodology. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
- 2.Stiny G (1980) Introduction to shape and shape grammars. Environ Plann B Plann Des 7(3):343–351Google Scholar
- 3.Hillier B, Hanson J (1984) The social logic of space. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Ericsson KA, Simon HA (1993) Protocol analysis: verbal reports as data. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- 5.Goldschmidt G (1990) Linkography: assessing design productivity. In: Trappl R (ed) Cyberbetics and system. World Scientific, Singapore, pp 291–298Google Scholar
- 6.Akin Ö, Lin C (1996) Design protocol data and novel design decisions. In: Cross N, Christiaans H, Dorst K (eds) Analysing design activity. Wiley, Chichester, pp 35–64Google Scholar
- 7.Hillier B (1996) Space is the machine. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- 8.Al Sayed K, Conroy Dalton R, Hölscher C (2010) Discursive design thinking: the role of explicit knowledge in creative architectural design reasoning. AIEDAM 24(Special Issue 2):211–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Mitchell W (1990) The logic of architecture. MIT Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
- 10.Heitor T, Duarte JP, Marques Pinto R (2003) Combining grammars and space syntax: formulating, evaluating and generating designs. In: Proceedings of the fourth space syntax international symposium, London, pp 28.1–28.18Google Scholar
- 11.Oxman R (1997) Design by re-representation: a model of visual reasoning in design. In Akin O (ed) Design studies: special issue on prescriptive and descriptive models of design 18(4):329–347Google Scholar
- 12.Goel V (1995) Sketches of thought. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- 13.Goldschmidt G (1992) Criteria for design evaluation: a process-oriented paradigm. In: Kalay YE (ed) Evaluating and predicting design performance. Wiley, New York, pp 67–79Google Scholar
- 14.Goldschmidt G (1995) The designer as a team of one. Des Stud 16(2):189–209CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- 15.Bertel S, Vrachliotis G, Freksa C (2007) Aspect-oriented building design: toward computer-aided approaches to solving spatial constraints in architecture. In: Allen GL (ed) Applied spatial cognition: from research to cognitive technology, pp 75–102Google Scholar
- 16.Turner A (2006) UCL Depthmap: spatial network analysis software, version 6.0818b. University College London, VR Centre of the Built Environment, LondonGoogle Scholar